ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025
Novel BEST1 Variant Characterization in a Large French Cohort in Light of Updated Bestrophin-1 Structure-Function Correlation.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To update knowledge on bestrophin-1 structure and function with the aim of assessing the pathogenicity of variants reported in the Leiden Open Variation Database (LOVD) and in a large French cohort of bestrophinopathies. Methods: All unique variants reported in the latest version (October 2024) of the BEST1-LOVD database were uploaded and curated. We described all BEST1 variants identified in French patients analyzed at Lille University Hospital, between 2008 and 2024. A comprehensive analysis of each variant was performed based on in silico tools (at DNA, RNA, and protein levels), as well as a literature review providing clinical data and functional assays. All of these data were used to classify the variant pathogenicity according to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) criteria. Results: We detailed 488 variants from the LOVD. Among 450 French patients, we identified 150 different variants, 40 of which were novel. We classified only eight variants as variants of unknown significance, four of which were already in the LOVD. We identified specific recurrent variants in the French population: p.(Gly26Asp), p.(Val90Met), p.(Val137Met), and p.(Ile230del), the last of which was present in 17 patients (3.8%). All new variants cause changes in chemical interactions within the protein and are associated with clinical pictures of bestrophinopathy. Conclusions: The study and comparison of these two large cohorts highlight variants specific to the French population, as well as differences in protein distribution, which are undoubtedly influenced by several population-specific factors. Through multiple in silico analyses, we were able to reclassify 93.3% of variants as likely pathogenic or pathogenic, thereby strengthening clinical diagnoses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.